Buying memory for my ASUS P5NSLI MB

[W. eWatson]

I have an Subject board with what I think is a Intel Pentium Dual-Core
E2140 CPU. One slot of four slots has a 2G memory card. I haven't yet
pulled it out to see the mfger. I'd like to go to 8G. I'm looking for
acceptable memory cards for the CPU, but am not sure about the need for
what is a "matched pair". It would be fine by me to add just 3 more chip
cards but maybe that's not the way to go. Comments.

BTW, one of the three slots is yellow in color. What's that about?

If I do have the right CPU, here's a bit of info about it.
<http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Penti...57PG0251M (BX80557E2140 - BXC80557E2140).html>

 

[Paul]

I have an Subject board with what I think is a Intel Pentium Dual-Core
E2140 CPU. One slot of four slots has a 2G memory card. I haven't yet
pulled it out to see the mfger. I'd like to go to 8G. I'm looking for
acceptable memory cards for the CPU, but am not sure about the need for
what is a "matched pair". It would be fine by me to add just 3 more chip
cards but maybe that's not the way to go. Comments.

BTW, one of the three slots is yellow in color. What's that about?

If I do have the right CPU, here's a bit of info about it.
<http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Penti...57PG0251M (BX80557E2140 - BXC80557E2140).html>

To use a Windows OS with 8GB of memory, you'd need a 64 bit version
of OS. That's because Windows doesn't make proper usage of things
like PAE (36 bit addressing on older Intel systems for example).

E2140 does support 64 bit, so you can install a 64 bit OS.
Then, you'll see all of the 8GB of RAM.

http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?i...essor+E2140+(1M+Cache,+1.60+GHz,+800+MHz+FSB)

Section 1.7.1 of the manual, shows two slots are yellow, and two slots
are black in color. The color coding is intended to show where to
install matched pairs of RAM.

http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/socket775/P5NSLI/e2234_p5nsli.pdf

In section 1.7.2 it says:

"For dual-channel configuration, the total size of memory modules
installed per channel must be the same

(DIMM_A1 + DIMM_A2 = DIMM_B1 + DIMM_B2)"

and that also means that there would not be a requirement to
match rows/columns/banks/ranks on all the modules. Both channels
should have the same total quantity of RAM.

A more important consideration, is how finicky, is that Nvidia
Northbridge ? It might not accept all brands of memory with equal
ease.

The Asus forums, may have threads discussing adventures in memory upgrading.
I'm not going to read all of this.

http://vip.asus.com/forum/topic.aspx?board_id=1&model=P5NSLI&SLanguage=en-us

Or, click the Feedback tab here, and read the couple hundred reviews for
the motherboard, to see whether any brands of memory cause problems.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131032

"9/6/2007 9:39:17 AM Not exactly amazing..

"Cons: Mine wouldn't run a 4gb quad channel kit for anything.
I used 3 different kits and it constantly bluescreened.
If I put any of the 2 sticks in, it didn't bluescreen."

And that tells you, it may be happy with 2x2GB but perhaps not so
well with 4x2GB. The four sticks being the problem. Another report
from the Newegg reviews.

"Cons: Board was incompatable with Corsair Value ram. Attempted
to run DDR2-667 in all 4 slots. Windows would not load and
continually froze. Attempet to run 2 slots as ASUS advised.
Same outcome."

The architecture of that board, has the memory interfacing to the
Nvidia Northbridge. So the memory compatibility, is between the
motherboard and the new DIMMs you're purchasing. The processor
type, is less of an issue. It's an issue of "how stable is Crush 19".

E2140
|
| FSB
|
Nvidia_Crush_19 -------- DIMM_A1, DIMM_A2
-------- DIMM_B1, DIMM_B2

More modern Intel computing products (LGA1156 or LGA1366) have the
memory controller on the processor. In which case, the processor
may be viewed as being part of the equation. But LGA775 uses a
Northbridge as the memory controller, so the processor
is "insulated" from the memory.

The Crucial listing for the board, is here. But this doesn't
tell you how cranky the chipset is, and what a pain it is
to get four sticks to work.

http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.aspx?model=P5NSLI

There is probably a reason the system has a single stick of
RAM in it right now. Think back...

Paul

 

[W. eWatson]

To use a Windows OS with 8GB of memory, you'd need a 64 bit version
of OS. That's because Windows doesn't make proper usage of things
like PAE (36 bit addressing on older Intel systems for example).

E2140 does support 64 bit, so you can install a 64 bit OS.
Then, you'll see all of the 8GB of RAM.

http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?i...essor+E2140+(1M+Cache,+1.60+GHz,+800+MHz+FSB)


Section 1.7.1 of the manual, shows two slots are yellow, and two slots
are black in color. The color coding is intended to show where to
install matched pairs of RAM.

http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/socket775/P5NSLI/e2234_p5nsli.pdf

In section 1.7.2 it says:

"For dual-channel configuration, the total size of memory modules
installed per channel must be the same

(DIMM_A1 + DIMM_A2 = DIMM_B1 + DIMM_B2)"

and that also means that there would not be a requirement to
match rows/columns/banks/ranks on all the modules. Both channels
should have the same total quantity of RAM.

A more important consideration, is how finicky, is that Nvidia
Northbridge ? It might not accept all brands of memory with equal
ease.

The Asus forums, may have threads discussing adventures in memory
upgrading.
I'm not going to read all of this.

http://vip.asus.com/forum/topic.aspx?board_id=1&model=P5NSLI&SLanguage=en-us


Or, click the Feedback tab here, and read the couple hundred reviews for
the motherboard, to see whether any brands of memory cause problems.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131032

"9/6/2007 9:39:17 AM Not exactly amazing..

"Cons: Mine wouldn't run a 4gb quad channel kit for anything.
I used 3 different kits and it constantly bluescreened.
If I put any of the 2 sticks in, it didn't bluescreen."

And that tells you, it may be happy with 2x2GB but perhaps not so
well with 4x2GB. The four sticks being the problem. Another report
from the Newegg reviews.

"Cons: Board was incompatable with Corsair Value ram. Attempted
to run DDR2-667 in all 4 slots. Windows would not load and
continually froze. Attempet to run 2 slots as ASUS advised.
Same outcome."

The architecture of that board, has the memory interfacing to the
Nvidia Northbridge. So the memory compatibility, is between the
motherboard and the new DIMMs you're purchasing. The processor
type, is less of an issue. It's an issue of "how stable is Crush 19".

E2140
|
| FSB
|
Nvidia_Crush_19 -------- DIMM_A1, DIMM_A2
-------- DIMM_B1, DIMM_B2

More modern Intel computing products (LGA1156 or LGA1366) have the
memory controller on the processor. In which case, the processor
may be viewed as being part of the equation. But LGA775 uses a
Northbridge as the memory controller, so the processor
is "insulated" from the memory.

The Crucial listing for the board, is here. But this doesn't
tell you how cranky the chipset is, and what a pain it is
to get four sticks to work.

http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.aspx?model=P5NSLI

There is probably a reason the system has a single stick of
RAM in it right now. Think back...

Paul

Thanks. That will give me a good bit of reading. My minimalist comment
at the moment is that I would hope going to 64-bit would not be painful.
However, how do I check to see if I'm already at 64-bit? See comment
below about the actual chip I have in the PC.

I took a look at the chip. It's a Patriot PSD22G6672H. 64-bits and about
$45 from NewEgg. I presume this would be compatible with the one I have
in the PC to give me 4G, if I really have a 32-bit PC.

 

[Paul]

Thanks. That will give me a good bit of reading. My minimalist comment
at the moment is that I would hope going to 64-bit would not be painful.
However, how do I check to see if I'm already at 64-bit? See comment
below about the actual chip I have in the PC.

I took a look at the chip. It's a Patriot PSD22G6672H. 64-bits and about
$45 from NewEgg. I presume this would be compatible with the one I have
in the PC to give me 4G, if I really have a 32-bit PC.

I like to look at the feedback, to see how many sticks arrived DOA
or had issues. I've actually used the DOA info, to change my brand
preferences.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820220296

*******

If I look at the "System" control panel on my system, it says

"Microsoft Windows XP"

and there is no mention of 64 bits. So mine is 32 bits.

If you had a 64 bit version, there would likely be mention of it there.

This is what WinXP x64 bit version looks like, for its system
control panel. The "x64" tells you it is the 64 bit version
of the OS. So "no number" means 32 bit, while seeing 64 there,
means it is the 64 bit version (can handle your 8GB case).

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/x86-64-rc1/win64-1.png

If you read the reviews for WinXP x64, drivers were one of
the issues with it. Perhaps you'd be upgrading to some
more recent 64 bit OS instead ?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116179

*******

What I'd do in your position is:

1) Buy a single 2GB stick.

2) When it arrives, you can either install it in the same
colored slot as the original (dual channel 2x2GB installed),
or run the new stick by itself while you start your testing.

3) The first thing you boot, with the new memory present, is memtest86+.
If you have the new stick by itself, there will be no ambiguity
as to which memory is causing a problem. I run this for a minimum
of two test passes. Test 5 may be the test that shows errors, if
they're going to happen. If you see just one error, in a bunch of
testing, sometimes bumping up the VDimm setting one notch, is
enough to fix it.

http://www.memtest.org/

4) Once you've completed two passes of that, your choices are then,
either to immediately boot your WinXP (32 bit) OS and try it out.
Or, boot a Linux LiveCD, as memory corruption while that is running,
won't be affecting your WinXP install. The more testing you do,
before booting WinXP, the less likely it is to get corrupted.

As long as you have a backup of the C: partition, you can likely
repair any damage in any case, whatever happens.

Memtest86+ tests all the memory, except about the first 1MB or so.
Some memory is reserved for BIOS functions, and the memory tester
can't safely test that area. Sections marked as reserved, are not
tested.

Once you've tested a single new stick on its own, that doesn't
prove that the two sticks will work together, just as well. Installing
the second stick, running 2x2GB, requires its own tests be run as
well. Some computers, become unstable when run in dual channel
mode, so it represents a separate test case.

The reason for starting with a single stick of RAM, is to make it
easier to reject the RAM right away, without investing a lot of
test time. You still need to test the "final memory configuration",
as that is the one you'll be using, and that is the one that must
be error free.

The thing is, the versions of memtest86+ plus I've used, don't say
"stick number 2 is bad". The program just gives an error address,
and it's up to your own resources, to map that to a memory stick.
And that is the main reason, for a quick test of a new stick, I
recommend testing it by itself, since then you don't have to
interpret the faulting address.

Paul

 

[Daave]

I have an Subject board with what I think is a Intel Pentium Dual-Core
E2140 CPU. One slot of four slots has a 2G memory card. I haven't yet
pulled it out to see the mfger. I'd like to go to 8G.

For the overwhelming majority of XP users, 2 GB is more than enough.
Exeptions would include those who do lots of video editing.

A quick way to determine if you have enough RAM is to open Task Manager
(Ctrl+Alt+Del) and click the Performance tab. Then note the three values
under Commit Charge (K): in the lower left-hand corner: Total, Limit,
and Peak.

The Total figure represents the amount of memory you are using at that
very moment. The Peak figure represents the highest amount of memory you
used since last bootup. If both these figures are below the value of
Physical Memory (K) Total, then you probably have plenty of RAM.
In case you want to explore this further, you may run Page File Monitor
for Windows XP:

http://www.dougknox.com/xp/utils/xp_pagefilemon.htm

As Paul stated, 8 GB pf RAM should only be done with 64-bit hardware and
matching OS. The overwhelming majority of XP users use the regular
32-bit version to match their 32-bit hardware.

 

[W. eWatson]

XP Pro is 32-bit. I think I'm just going to go with another 2G Patriot
chip for the time being. I plan to upgrade to Win7 some time this
winter. I have the upgrade package. Apparently, that will allow me to
got easily to 64-bit.

 

[W. eWatson]

For the overwhelming majority of XP users, 2 GB is more than enough.
Exeptions would include those who do lots of video editing.

A quick way to determine if you have enough RAM is to open Task Manager
(Ctrl+Alt+Del) and click the Performance tab. Then note the three values
under Commit Charge (K): in the lower left-hand corner: Total, Limit,
and Peak.

The Total figure represents the amount of memory you are using at that
very moment. The Peak figure represents the highest amount of memory you
used since last bootup. If both these figures are below the value of
Physical Memory (K) Total, then you probably have plenty of RAM.
In case you want to explore this further, you may run Page File Monitor
for Windows XP:

http://www.dougknox.com/xp/utils/xp_pagefilemon.htm

As Paul stated, 8 GB pf RAM should only be done with 64-bit hardware and
matching OS. The overwhelming majority of XP users use the regular
32-bit version to match their 32-bit hardware.

Good point about checking memory usage with the Task Mgr. I recently got
into this pickle running three programs simultaneously. Two were
professionally written comples programs, call them camera and sky, and
another by a modestly experienced individual, call it map.

map died with a message that it ran out of memory, and a message about
sending the results to MS. Very strange, since the other two programs
are I am sure quite large in size by comparison. map uses the other
two. When the problem happens again, I'll look at actual memory usage.

BTW, I had a choice with the MS message to look at a folder of results
related to the message. I saved the link, and closed down the PC
thinking I could follow the link the next day, in C:/.../temp. Not so.
It was gone. I'm told that it's likely the supposed results are
virtually useless anyway.

 

[Alias]

XP Pro is 32-bit. I think I'm just going to go with another 2G Patriot
chip for the time being. I plan to upgrade to Win7 some time this
winter. I have the upgrade package. Apparently, that will allow me to
got easily to 64-bit.

You'll have to do a clean install of Win 7 64 bit and it probably won't
run very fast due to your old and slow processor. You may want to
consider getting a new one that's at least 2Ghz per core. As Win 7 uses
a gig of RAM just to sit at idle, getting at least 4GB of RAM is a good
idea.

 

[W. eWatson]

You'll have to do a clean install of Win 7 64 bit and it probably won't
run very fast due to your old and slow processor. You may want to
consider getting a new one that's at least 2Ghz per core. As Win 7 uses
a gig of RAM just to sit at idle, getting at least 4GB of RAM is a good
idea.

Your saying a upgrade to Win 7 from XP Pro won't allow me to go to
64-bit from 32-bit? The current plan is just to add 2G. That gives me
4G. 8G or more when I upgrade to Win 7.

 

[Tester]

Your saying a upgrade to Win 7 from XP Pro won't allow me to go to
64-bit from 32-bit? The current plan is just to add 2G. That gives me
4G. 8G or more when I upgrade to Win 7.

All win7 upgrade CD/DVD will perform a clean install because there is no
"upgrade" in the real sense as we know understand it. The reason, as
far as I am aware, is because Microsoft is not allowed to install and
make Internet Explorer a default browser in its operating system but as
Microsoft made Internet Explorer part of its operating system in XP, the
only way to get rid of it is to remove the OS completely!

Of course this doesn't make sense but the fact of the matter is YOU MUST
BACKUP YOUR DATA before you start the upgrade process and also make sure
you have all the CDs and serial numbers to your other applications like
Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop etc.

You can go from 32 bit XP to 64 Bit Win7 and the retail version of Win7
comes with both versions in a box.

hth

 

[Tester]

I should have also added that to install a 64-bit version of Win7 , you
need a processor that's capable of running a 64-bit version of Windows.
Adding additional RAM will not make your system 64 bit compatible.

All win7 upgrade CD/DVD will perform a clean install because there is no
"upgrade" in the real sense as we know understand it. The reason, as
far as I am aware, is because Microsoft is not allowed to install and
make Internet Explorer a default browser in its operating system but as
Microsoft made Internet Explorer part of its operating system in XP, the
only way to get rid of it is to remove the OS completely!

Of course this doesn't make sense but the fact of the matter is YOU MUST
BACKUP YOUR DATA before you start the upgrade process and also make sure
you have all the CDs and serial numbers to your other applications like
Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop etc.

You can go from 32 bit XP to 64 Bit Win7 and the retail version of Win7
comes with both versions in a box.

hth

I should have also added that to install a 64-bit version of Win7 , you
need a processor that's capable of running a 64-bit version of Windows.
Adding additional RAM will not make your system 64 bit compatible.

 

[Dominique]

Your saying a upgrade to Win 7 from XP Pro won't allow me to go to
64-bit from 32-bit? The current plan is just to add 2G. That gives me
4G. 8G or more when I upgrade to Win 7.

Since you have the upgrade package, you have both installation DVDs (32 and
64bits). Anyway you cannot upgrade from XP to Seven whatever the number of
bits.

When you start from XP, the installation will create a windows.old folder
and then proceed with a "clean" installation. Your data should be safe
(backup anyway) but you'll have to reinstall your programs. Make sure you
have 64 bits drivers for all your hardware.

Direct upgrade is only allowed from Vista and at the same bit level only.

As for the comment on your "old and slow" processor, when I received my
Win7 upgrade packages, I installed one on a Pentium4 - 3ghz with 2 GB RAM
(which is an older system than yours) and I found it ran at least as well
as XP. I revert back to XP with that one because there where no "Vista/7"
driver for my video card which includes a TV tuner. The video chip was
supported but the tuner was not. I'm sure you can go ahead with Win7 on
your system.

HTH

 

[W. eWatson]

I should have also added that to install a 64-bit version of Win7 , you
need a processor that's capable of running a 64-bit version of Windows.
Adding additional RAM will not make your system 64 bit compatible.




I should have also added that to install a 64-bit version of Win7 , you
need a processor that's capable of running a 64-bit version of Windows.
Adding additional RAM will not make your system 64 bit compatible.

I do believe the ASUS P5NSLI MB (mfgered 12/28/2006) is capable of
supporting 64-bit OS with dual core. Apparently, when I installed XP
Pro, I stated 32-bit. The CPU is an Intel x86 Family 6 Model 15 stepping
2 1600Mhz.

BTW, I was told by a tech guy at a local store that there may only one
product, Adobe?, that supports 64-bit. I guess then that means 64-bit OS
is where all the improvements are in speed, etc.?

 

[W. eWatson]

Since you have the upgrade package, you have both installation DVDs (32 and
64bits). Anyway you cannot upgrade from XP to Seven whatever the number of
bits.

When you start from XP, the installation will create a windows.old folder
and then proceed with a "clean" installation. Your data should be safe
(backup anyway) but you'll have to reinstall your programs. Make sure you
have 64 bits drivers for all your hardware.

Direct upgrade is only allowed from Vista and at the same bit level only.

As for the comment on your "old and slow" processor, when I received my
Win7 upgrade packages, I installed one on a Pentium4 - 3ghz with 2 GB RAM
(which is an older system than yours) and I found it ran at least as well
as XP. I revert back to XP with that one because there where no "Vista/7"
driver for my video card which includes a TV tuner. The video chip was
supported but the tuner was not. I'm sure you can go ahead with Win7 on
your system.

HTH

Oh, Joy. Yes, I'll put the upgrade off for several months. I don't need
the interruption now.

Last December I bought this Win 7 PC, and spent lots of time
transferring programs and files here. It looks like what I see here is
something akin to what I did then.

It looks like I should move my data and install application files from
the C-drive on the XP Pro PC to a secondary disk, say D:, then use the
upgrade to Win7 to save whatever is left on the C-drive to windows.old
folder. Presumably, I can put that on the D-drive, but I'm not sure I
would even want it at all. Who needs an unworkable OS on their PC. As
the upgrade proceeds, I would guess I can choose 64-bit (or I guess
there is no choice per above--my ASUS can use 64-bit) and Win 7 OS would
then go onto the C-drive.

Sounds like lots of fun.

 

[Paul]

Good point about checking memory usage with the Task Mgr. I recently got
into this pickle running three programs simultaneously. Two were
professionally written comples programs, call them camera and sky, and
another by a modestly experienced individual, call it map.

map died with a message that it ran out of memory, and a message about
sending the results to MS. Very strange, since the other two programs
are I am sure quite large in size by comparison. map uses the other
two. When the problem happens again, I'll look at actual memory usage.

BTW, I had a choice with the MS message to look at a folder of results
related to the message. I saved the link, and closed down the PC
thinking I could follow the link the next day, in C:/.../temp. Not so.
It was gone. I'm told that it's likely the supposed results are
virtually useless anyway.

Well, your "spider sense" should be telling you, it didn't
really run out of memory. The program only thinks it ran out
of memory.

I'm willing to bet, if you bought 8GB of RAM, switched to a
64 bit OS, ran the errant program in compatibility mode,
it would *still* throw a memory error, and you'd be no
further ahead.

Your only choice, is to collect any error messages, look for
a .dmp file, and work with those to determine what the real
problem is.

Paul

 

[Dominique]

"W. eWatson" <[email protected]> écrivait @news.eternal-september.org:

As
the upgrade proceeds, I would guess I can choose 64-bit (or I guess
there is no choice per above--my ASUS can use 64-bit) and Win 7 OS would
then go onto the C-drive.

Sounds like lots of fun.

There is no choice, to change the bit level of an OS (Windows at least) 32
to 64 or 64 to 32, one needs to do a clean installation. An "upgrade" from
XP (Custom install) would work since, in the end, it's a "clean"
installation.

 

[W. eWatson]

"W. eWatson"<[email protected]> écrivait @news.eternal-september.org:



There is no choice, to change the bit level of an OS (Windows at least) 32
to 64 or 64 to 32, one needs to do a clean installation. An "upgrade" from
XP (Custom install) would work since, in the end, it's a "clean"
installation.

Oh, I'm not against changing over to 64-bit. I'll file this thread away
for the right moment to do it.

 

[W. eWatson]

Well, your "spider sense" should be telling you, it didn't
really run out of memory. The program only thinks it ran out
of memory.

I'm willing to bet, if you bought 8GB of RAM, switched to a
64 bit OS, ran the errant program in compatibility mode,
it would *still* throw a memory error, and you'd be no
further ahead.

Your only choice, is to collect any error messages, look for
a .dmp file, and work with those to determine what the real
problem is.

Paul

Oh, the upgrade and increase in memory are pretty secondary to the the
error message now. I'm in no rush. I strongly suspect the memory problem
is caused by a not too professional job of someone writing a program.
I'm not sure I mentioned there are three program involved. I'm highly
suspicious about one. I have a method worked out to catch it, if it's at
all possible. I'm going to guess though that it won't happen easily in
the future. In fact, I expect to dump the potential offender fairly soon.